Re: Adding a font to the current stack (smarter fallbacks)

Right, I have been influenced by previous mail. It's cleary NOT inheriting 
that we want. Anyway, you got the idea.

selector { property: value, $tbc; } or
selector { property: concat('value, ', $next); }

But it has a drawback: all the to-be-continued values must be using a 
compatible format with the previous (and potentially unknown) ones. For 
example, I'm not sure that the following would work

a { background: none; }
.someEffect { background: url('mytileimage.png'), $tbc; }
// implies a.someEffect { background: url('mytileimage.png'), none; }



-----Message d'origine----- 
From: Tab Atkins Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 10:49 PM
To: François REMY
Cc: Charles Pritchard ; Matthew Wilcox ; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: Adding a font to the current stack (smarter fallbacks)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:36 PM, François REMY
<fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Yes, that's a common problem. Filters suffer from the same issue. 
> Transforms
> too. An idea would be to allow a new syntax that extends inherit. However,
> allowing "inherit" anywhere in a value is too complex, and it's a breaking
> change.
>
> Two options comes in my mind:
>
> (1) Use "inherit" as a special variable :
>
> .translate100 { transform: translate(100,100), var(inherit); }
> .zoom1 { transform: scale(1.1), var(inherit); }
> // or whatever the variable syntax may be
>
> (2) Use a special "inherit" function that can takes the place of any value 
> :
>
> .translate100 { transform: inherit(translate(100,100), ...); }
> .zoom1 { transform: inherit(scale(1.1), ...); }
> // or any symbol that could replace the ...


Again, inherit is *not* what you want.  You don't want the current
inherit behavior in any way, or even to invoke the *idea* of
inheriting.  This is about manipulating the *current* cascaded value,
not your parent's value.

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2012 22:08:26 UTC